Jool on Openwrt (Nftables) #372
Comments
|
Hi @ydahhrk |
|
(Note: This issue branched off #273.)
My guess is 2.4.2 should be fine. I used 2.4.6 because it's the one I had. How come you're only having this problem now? It has always been 2.4.6.
Did you mean 2.4.2? Please send me your new Makefile; your output doesn't really tell me anything on its own. |
Because before, the makefile as compiling from tarball, now I'm trying to compile from the actual github source so we're not bound to a specific release, and for test cases like this one.
Yes, sorry 😄 Here's the makefile: |
By the way: If the problem is that you don't have a tarball, you can simply create one by running That way, you might be able to skip Openwrt's libtool.
One thing that strikes me as odd is that you only define one This configure will probably be fine when you're running
Also, I have a pedantic observation: " I suggest you call them " |
Did you tweak this dependency in some way? The error messages are complaining about |
Either way that would be more difficult for testing and for example now that this optional iptables-free variant without a release it would be great if it was compiled from source.
Yeah I know, this is just temporary, as soon as it builds I can start breaking it and testing some stuff. I'm trying to locate where each flag should be added and where to put the "if"'s and variables, etc.
That is indeed a great suggestion, I'll do that.
I did not, I left it as it was, I just tried deleting that but the error is the same... should I change it to something else? |
Well... argp is such a basic dependency, most distributions don't expect programs to declare it explicitly. But I remember at some point dealing with one in which this wasn't the case. Maybe it was Openwrt. I'm mentioning this because the error is clearly telling us that it's not finding the argp dependency. And you don't seem to declare it explicitly: Also, what does the exclamation mark mean here? Is it negation? Are you, by any chance, explicitly asking it to exclude argp? |
These are for the built and compiled package, and from what you're telling me the issue is that it can't find argp while building, correct?
I really have no idea, this seems to make no effect on the build process, I'm trying to compare it with other packages but to no avail, seems I'm out of my depth... |
Yeah. "undefined reference to `XXX'" is the typical error we get during linking, when a function is declared and referenced, but not defined anywhere. |
|
Hi @ydahhrk |
|
Sure. |
|
So, I've been investigating and I have noticed that if to build the tarball I have to do "./configure" this won't allow me to build with xtables disabled, correct? |
|
No. Remember that, once you have the tarball, you have to do another
configure inside.
You'd disable xtables then.
…On Wed, Jan 19, 2022, 12:38 PM Tiago Gaspar ***@***.***> wrote:
So, I've been investigating and I have noticed that if to build the
tarball I have to do "./configure" this won't allow me to build with
xtables disabled, correct?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#372 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AASHNF3IE2QSAYRNHMBGPS3UW4ALRANCNFSM5MF4EJAQ>
.
Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS
<https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675>
or Android
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
|
Then I'm at a loss again, because I pulled the old makefile and just replaced it with the new tarball, created as you explained and added the flag to disable xtables in the kernel modules, yet the pragma (if that is the correct word) you added to mention the disabled xtables doesn't appear, even though I believe I see the flag passed correctly. |
|
Ok, forget the pragma message. The programs and modules now print the status on startup: $ jool --version
(Xtables disabled)
4.1.6.1
$ sudo modprobe jool
$ dmesg -t
(Xtables disabled)
NAT64 Jool v4.1.6.1 module inserted.
$
$ jool_siit --version
(Xtables disabled)
4.1.6.1
$ sudo modprobe jool_siit
$ dmesg -t
(Xtables disabled)
SIIT Jool v4.1.6.1 module inserted.Note, if xtables is enabled, it should print (Xtables enabled)If you don't even get that, maybe you're compiling the wrong branch. |
|
Hey @ydahhrk Sorry for the long delay in answering. I've managed to do it, but I ended up adding only the netfilter one since openwrt will drop iptables soon. Could you take a look and see what you think? Thanks for everything! |
|
Please hang on for a few days; I have covid. |
|
The pull request has been merged, here it is: But first, I hope you get well soon! Focus on getting better! 😄 |
|
Hi, I know you're not available but it'll stay here for when you get back. Thanks and I hope you're getting better! |
Why did you change your sample configuration files? tiagogaspar8/packages@b24864f#diff-aefea90b17c49972efc7def1206a531e27630d4fb770eea208a5c4c5fe07a97f Their suggested configuration now sucks.
Yes, that would be the smart thing to do. But conntrack is nftables. Jool has nothing to do with nftables at present. Ergo, Jool has nothing to do with conntrack. Jool's connection tracking gimmic is BIB and session. |
I actually got them from the atomic configuration examples in jool.mx website😅
I see, that makes sense, but before, in OpenWrt with the ip6tables firewall, I used jool netfilter too and I seem to recall conntrack had the states of connection, at least in bwmon I could see ipv4 Vs ipv6 traffic counting, does this make sense or is my memory bad? Also, on a sidenote, nf-conntrack is independent of iptables or nftables, it is a module common to both, I recently even merged a commit making conntrack independent from iptables. Is this correct? Or am I missing something? Hope you're better 😁 |
|
Jool 4.1.7 is released now; closing.
I'm guessing you were measuring something else. Jool hasn't interfaced with conntrack since very early development (more than a decade ago).
I guess. |
Oh wow, weird Should I revert the config file examples? |
|
Sorry for taking so long to respond. I'm going to upload better and updated configuration examples to the documentation over the course of the day. If you want, you can copy that. |
|
Updated: https://www.jool.mx/en/config-atomic.html. You might need to press F5 to flush the cache. In my opinion, the examples are better now. Most of the globals now include their default values, so it's harder to end up with a misbehaving translator. |
|
Hi, |
Hi!
As asked I opened another thread to discuss this.
I have came into an issue, where OpenWrt has libtool 2.4.2 and jool is requiring 2.4.6.
Is there a requirement for this or can I patch jool to support the 2.4.2 version?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: